Skip to main content

About your Search

20121226
20130103
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
election reporting for "the new york times" magazine and in talking to jim messina, campaign manager of the obama campaign, david axelrod, robert emanuel and ascii none, how the next four years under an obama presidency given that the house composition before less the same. >> most certainly going to be similar. >> uniformly very unfair, and other verses as a talking point, with the fever will break, that the american people as they vote for president obama for another four years will basically be voting against obstructionism. republicans would get the message and walk in a fashion towards the center. >> i can't see that happening at all. >> that's their talking point. >> are you any more optimistic? governor romney is supposed to the president being reenacted that their son joe waiting for him after he gets into office? >> now, i'm not. i wrote a story for "the new york times" magazine on governor romney and specifically his time as governor day. about three weeks ago or so. the basic piece concludes is i interviewed a number of people and particularly the more conservative house r
-time employees, ben, libya, evan, mike, julie, richard, jennifer, nick, michelle, jim, doory, jesse, angela, kathleen, carolyn, rachel, eric, jennifer, chris, cody, greg, katelyn, stephanie, beth, bennett, nathan , emily, mary, abby, lee, shannon, christina, p.j., alex, nicki, randy, john, the two best veteran constituent service reps you could ever want. sharon, rachel, cara. mr. speaker, all of them were loyal to the district and i read their names into the record to thank them for their service and loyalty to me, with you especially for their service to -- but especially for their service to the district. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from alabama, mr. brook, for five minutes. mr. brooks: mr. speaker, the bush tax cuts history illuminates why american families face huge tax increases on january 1. the bush tax cuts had two purposes, first, stimulate the economy, create jobs, cut unemployment, and cut the deficit. second, cut taxes to help american families take care of their own needs. in just three years thanks to the bush tax cuts unemployment
that would vote against it because he is a fairly conservative republican. host: he will be replacing jim demint in the senate, who is stepping down. jim demint, one of three that did not vote last night. guest: i do not know if that means he was not here, or he abstained. i imagine he could not have voted to support this. host: donna, independent caller. caller: my concern is that i am basically lost in the cracks. i was a hard worker, paid my taxes, i had an accident, and now i have cancer. i get my medicare, but still i am having to pay for more insurance. my social security check went up, but i have to pay the high price of medical care because of the bills, and it is not fair because i can not get supplemental insurance to help me pay for my disease. i do not think it is fair enough to where i am lost in the crack, and i can barely make it. all of my money goes directly to medical costs. about i'm sorry to hear that, if a tragedy, but she points out the problem. when you go after 2% of the taxpayers and small businesses to fix the problems better on our shoulders, it is picking the w
changed with in the room. >> jim of cnn sends out this week. -- tweet. how could the senate passed this 89-8 and yet it is so hard to get it done in the house? >> this is not the first time this has happened. there was a payroll tax cut extension. when you are elected, you have voters from all over the state. you have a lot of people with similar views about the world. when you are talking to your base back home, that is the way it works. one house member, a republican, was saying he had to watch out for his own voters more than the electorate in general. >> thank you for holding. you are on the air. >> hello. i want to know why he. i worked at a company for five years. i am unemployed now. i am getting unemployment. hi husband doesn't work. it was a single family income. i want to know and understand how a cameo -- can you try to raise everyone's taxes and make the poor and like me -- and i am struggling to keep my home right now. nobody wants to come to an agreement on the fiscal cliff. >> i saw a report by the washington post that 71% of people will have their taxes raised by this deal?
for this country. host: we move on to jim in fort myers, fla. caller: thank you for taking my call. what is your suggestions to solve these problems? are you still for the electoral college system? how will you improve the campaign financing? i would like to hear what you thought after all of your research. guest: there are a few different ways to go. i do not advocate a particular policy position, but there are some implications. in terms of fund-raising, it is a result of low contribution limits, with rapidly rising campaign costs. if you favor the public system, you will want to revamp its note it offers a larger pool -- so it offers a larger pool to opt in. that would limit the amount of time presidents have to campaign. you might see the problem is the contribution limit. contribution limits on the amount of money you can give are small relative to the amount of money it takes to run a campaign. you might say to raise the contribution limits. with the electoral college, if it were abolished and we elect our presidents through a national popular vote, you could have a lively debate. voters i
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5